eq2fandomcom-20200225-history
Talk:EQ2 Zone Connections Map
Page Layout I'm in Kodia's boat as to page layout... As ginormous as this image has gotten, short of scaling it down (which would likely create image artifacts, unfortunately) there's not a good way to display it. I liked the way Kodia had the page laid out, since it made the image semi-cohesive, versus the thumbnail version which is a definite squit-inducer. But anywho... /shrug, my two cents on the matter. -- Mysterious drake 04:15, May 31, 2010 (UTC) :That was odd, your edits didn't show up when I edited the page. I agree that it looks better spread out (heck, even now it's still kinda small to read). I did reduce the actual filesize of the image however: 5000 pixels wide is pretty ludicrous, and makes it look terrible "full size," so I've reduced it to a reasonable number. It's still quite big at "full size" now but not wastefully so (and no detail is lost). --lordebon 04:55, May 31, 2010 (UTC) Thanks for the feed back, I'm kinda new at wiki editing, but I think I made the changes you requested. - I removed the credits from the image. - I reduced the size of the file. Thanks, Palendir : I think a good idea to consider, with final image size is not to exceed the total width of a user's monitor by more than one and a half its total pixel width or height. I can't say what is or is not the current "average" screensize, especially since not all people run at high-resolutions and/or the highest resolution their monitors can handle. Having said that, let's just stick with the 1200pixel-wide scaled down image which Lordebon uploaded. -- Mysterious drake 05:21, May 31, 2010 (UTC) :I had already fixed all the aforementioned things. One of the central pillars of a wiki is consensus, while another is the ability for anyone to correct something, rather than relying on the original author. So far 3 people have expressed an opinion that a 600px wide version be used rather than a thumbnail, so please stop reverting that change: instead, talk about it here, and if more users agree that a thumbnail is better than a thumbnail is what will be used. The second pillar is important in that anyone can edit the page to improve it; this is what Kodia originally did, and when you reverted it Mysterious drake commented on the talk page. As for the image itself: I'd like to mark AfD the 'reduced size' image, since it's bigger than the one that was there (that I re-uploaded). An image should only be big enough to serve it's purpose, and one that is 2500 pixels wide is overly big, and duplicates the content of the "ver_3" file. An image could be that size if it really needed to be, but this one isn't that detailed. It's important to consider that many users still use relative small resolutions, and overly large images become difficult for them to view. :Please don't take this as discouragement, but rather a bit of advice on wiki-editing. It's good to "Be Bold" and make changes or create pages, but when changes are reverted or contested the next step is to discuss them rather than continually revert. --lordebon 05:23, May 31, 2010 (UTC) :::It's times like these where, outlandish and infeasible as it would be to implement, a warning that "hey, someone else is working on this RIGHT NOW" would be nice. Gotta love overlap.... -- Mysterious drake 05:25, May 31, 2010 (UTC) ::::Indeed. Oh, and one thing this has made me think of... this zone connection map would actually be best if made into a scalable vector graphic (SVG). Then the saved file size would be irrelevant, as a large rasterized (jpg) image would no longer be necessary; a user wanting a larger version of the file could just re-rasterize the SVG into whatever size they wanted for their own use. A good bit of free software for making such things is Inkscape; in about two weeks when my workload de-crazies I might take the time to rebuild it as an SVG. --lordebon 05:33, May 31, 2010 (UTC) We do actually have a template for things that are actively being worked on. :) Oh, and for the record, I did know that one of y'all would change the size. The thumbed image was really what was bothering me. More descriptive text next to the image would have made the layout less...bothersome to my eyes. My personal preference is to thumb the images much of the time, but when there's so little text next to it, the image looks goofy so small. If the image is so small as this one was, and there's nothing much describing it, it seems to me that it should just be bigger or all you're doing is requiring the user to make an extra click happen. In user interface design (part of my background) the fewer the clicks the better to get the message or information across.--Kodia 13:03, May 31, 2010 (UTC) :Aye, most time images should be thumbnails, but in this case I think the main purpose of the page is to host the map, so it gets to be reasonably sized (kind of like the AA tab images on AA pages). That way folks can read it moderately well right on the page and only have to click to full size if they want a closer-up view. --lordebon 15:51, May 31, 2010 (UTC) Hello all, thanks for the feedback, I posted what should be the final version of the map. I had to remove all the carpet links as they no longer exist any more. The file is 1275x825 and is displayed at 600dpi. One small problem though, I can't get the "click here for full resolution" text back to the bottom of the page. Thanks, Palendir I got it fixed, everything looks good now. Thx Palendir :I've tagged the old file AfD since you uploaded a new 'reduced' one -- only one file for the same image is necessary, you can just upload a new version on the 'reduced' one when you make changes. As for the carpet links: they were consolidated with the transport update. Rather than carpets, griffons, etc. for overland transport most of it uses the "World Bell" (the little globe style bell) now. There's still a few griffon links for inter-zone, but the carpets are now in-zone transport only. The links the carpets used to do are now just part of the world bell. (Oh, and when using talk pages please sign using ~~~~ as the blurb at the top mentions). --lordebon 04:38, June 1, 2010 (UTC)